Independent and impartial.

This, uh, follows on the response that we received from the, the Minister of Transport that indicated that, uh, in the last, uh, three years, uh, four thousand five hundred, uh, pedestrians have lost their lives on the major highways, uh, with, uh, over nine thousand, uh, serious injuries.

So there, there are a number of reasons that, uh, leads to this.

One, it's, uh, not, uh, enough, uh, pedestrian crossing and, and also residents, uh, or mo- or pedestrians, uh, that don't, uh, uh, know, uh, that it's not, uh, allowed to cross the, uh, the national highway because it's actually illegal.

And this was prompted, uh, this question that I'd asked to the minister was prompted by, uh, the arrest of, uh, some pedestrians, uh, in and around Kempton Park who were attempting, uh, to cross, uh, uh, a national highway.

As part of the solution that we, we propose as Rise Mzansi, it's, uh, increase, uh, education and awareness, uh, so that the, uh, the, the neighboring... 'cause where these accidents happen, it's, uh, where you have, uh, the national highway, uh, closer, uh, to residential areas.

Uh, and then you have people crossing from one residential area, uh, to the, to the one on the other side, and that's where we need increased, uh, uh, awareness, but also the, the, the visibility of, uh, traffic, uh, law enfor- enforcers.

But now what should traffic authorities be doing differently to prevent these deaths?

Tell me, Honourable Member, are you the only one fighting this in Parliament? At the rate

in terms of pushing, I'm pushing a lot, but others have started joining.

When I started, I was a lone ranger.

But you must make arguments that makes other people take it.

Because, you see, one of the things about ourselves as rising suns, We recognize where we are weak.

Our weakness is in the numbers.

We don't have enough numbers.

What nine to five would you do? If not politics, what 9 to 5 would you be doing? I had a career.

SABC News, independent and impartial.

An extension insofar as allowing political parties, uh, to submit, uh, further names, but there's a disagreement, uh, or varying, um, takes in terms of what the deadline should be.

With those that, uh, the original, uh, proposal was, uh, 48 hours, uh, which means it's, uh, by end of business on Friday, which allows, uh, the, the legal team to check availability and also due diligence and to have that report, uh, both in terms of availability and, uh, uh, and any matters of due diligence, uh, to, to serve, uh, to be submitted to members by Monday, uh, so that by the time we meet on Wednesday, at least members have had, uh, sight in terms of who's available, who's not available, uh, but at least, uh, 48 hours, uh, before the meeting.

Uh, so there's ...

That's the first proposal.

The second one is that, uh, the, the, the nomination be, uh, closes on Monday, uh, uh, as I hear you correctly, uh, Honorable Malema, uh, that it closes on Monday, uh, as the second one.

And there was one, uh, which was, uh, asking for seven days.

Even

before the Majlanga Commission was instituted to say that the current method of doing audits, lifestyle audits in the police, the vaping, it's insufficient, because what has become clear, more defined through the regulations and much longer commissions, is that Yeah, at a certain level, you need to say, all right, we hear what you are saying on these documents, but there needs to be a verification that the information that you have presented, it's a true reflection of what's happening.

What we do know is that there are many police members, senior leadership, that are living way beyond their the meals that are provided by the certificate police service through the salaries that they receive and that's what the lifestyle audit is able to uh to then get to say these are this is the income the legitimate income that you receive but the life that you need it's way beyond that so how do you explain this extra source of uh of income or expenditure that you are able to to give so that's the first thing the second one that we need to uh that needs to be done is around this rating because rating goes beyond just the financial and other things, is to see whether there are no links between an individual, such leadership, both in terms of the criminal networks, but might very well indicate that there are South African police services that are working with foreign governments.

And that's a huge, huge concern for us because it puts the security risk of the country and the people of this country at danger.

But I think we worry if it doesn't just move corruption from a uniform to a civilian bureaucrat.

It's a huge concern.

One of the big issues that we have in this country is the supply chain.

And I made this call on the 4th of July.

Maybe if you can just help us understand what is Rise Mzanzi? What are the founding principles that informs your ideological thinking in terms of the economy and transformation in South Africa?

So, ourselves as Rise Mzanzi, what we exist to do is to build a safe, prosperous, equal and united South Africa in a generation We are constitutionalists.

We believe that the constitution that we have, Eduardo VIII of 1996, has got correct foundation that sees the role of the state and the private sector playing in the development of the country.

So there has to be an effective government and wishing or hoping that things can be done, but it must be to its part, but also affect on through its actions, through its regulation, where industry operates.

We believe that there's still a long way to redress the imbalances of the past and there needs to be continuous intervention, but those interventions depends on an effective professional public service.

If the public servants, whether a teacher, a nurse, a doctor, an electrician, a civil engineer, wake up each morning and do what they are employed to do, you believe that we will be on the way to faster economic growth that then addresses unemployment, poverty, and inequality.

How far is that process? And maybe if you can just tell us more about this, what exactly are you advocating for in this?

So there are areas that are moving with pace.

Tell me why South Africans can trust this process.

Thanks very much, Jeremy.

It is indeed the biggest in terms of the task ahead.

It's the first of its kind in South Africa.

There's never been an impeachment committee in democratic South Africa.

And I don't think there's ever been one since the Union of South Africa.

So in terms of the process, taking just the guidance that has come from the constitutional court in terms of the rules and following the rules to the latter, that's what we are going to do so that whatever outcome comes of the a committee itself must be able to withstand the legal scrutiny.

How are you going to stop political parties from turning this into theatre?

Will you be supporting that or do you not think it's necessary?

It's unnecessary.

It's the same kind of what I call pedestrian thinking.

Because if you are to exclude her, you must equally exclude all the members that will have participated in the vote in 2022.

And we don't think we are there.

If the Constitutional Court wanted to bar any member of parliament from participating in the processes of this nature, the constitutional court would have pronounced themselves on that matter.

As far as we are aware, the constitutional court has not pronounced themselves on this matter.

So are you proceeding as if this committee is going to begin hearings, or are you waiting for the outcome of the court appeal or a potential interdict application from the president? Or what is the plan going forward?

Will you be supporting that or do you not think it's necessary? No.

It's unnecessary.

It's the same kind of what I call pedestrian thinking.

Because if you are to exclude her, you must equally exclude all the members that will have participated in the vote in 2022.

And we don't think we are there.

If the Constitutional Court wanted to bar any member of parliament from participating in the processes of this nature, the constitutional court would have pronounced themselves on that matter.

As far as we are aware, the constitutional court has not pronounced themselves on this matter.

So are you proceeding as if this committee is going to begin hearings or are you waiting for the outcome of the court appeal or a potential interdict application from the president? Or what is the plan going forward?

...what, how would you sum up the task of the inquiry, um, if, if it is not to be judged by its outcome, by its, but rather by its process?

Yeah, it's a, it's a massive responsibility, uh, John.

It's the first, uh, Section 89 committee in democratic South Africa.

Um, so this committee has got a responsibility to restore the trust in the work of Parliament, uh, from the people of, uh, of, uh, of this country.

And the manner in which the proceedings, um, uh, have to unfold should be, uh, in a way that South Africans will look at it and feel that, uh, we as representatives in t- in Parliament take, take this particular responsibility seriously, uh, that we are not going to use the, uh, the, the committee to gran- to grandstand, but to seek, uh, the truth, uh, and work and ensure that each member, uh, of the committee, uh, feel that, uh, their views have been heard, they participate fully, they interact, uh, with, uh, witnesses, uh, expert witnesses, and everyone else that will come to the committee.

Because it is in the manner in which we conduct ourselves as, uh, as, as members of Parliament, uh, that will restore the much-needed trust between Parliament and the people of this country.

Uh, for the rest of this week, maybe the, the week following, what are your key tasks?

Uh, the first order of business tomorrow is to meet with the team assigned to the committee.